Hmm....got back from a trip back east (Cleveland) to see my folks and had an opportunity to show my work to a number of gallaries. Got some positive response and some possibilities I need to follow up on after the holidays. The question in my post is this.
My mother took some of my work and later, after I'd left, took my pieces to the Riley Gallery (Nice stuff!!!) which happens to be next door to her studio. (she's an oil painting artist) The lady at Riley like my work (not enough to want it but that's ok, Riley's a bit out of my league to be sure) but commented that I needed to change the name of my business, Enfusiasm, to something that contained my name (Hoppes Glass Art). I found that somewhat interesting as I knew naming my studio was important, but not so much as to prevent me from selling my glass. I did a quick, unscientific survey looking in the member list of the board and across glass artists I know and it is somewhere around 50% with probably a little more advantage to NO name inclusion as opposed to name inclusion.
I'm not changing my name just because this lady thinks I should but it brings up an interesting point. Should you name your studio after yourself? Does it really make that much of a difference?
Phil.........of Enfusiasm!!!
"...a rose by any other name..."
Moderator: Brad Walker
-
Phil Hoppes
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 2:20 pm
- Location: Overgaard, AZ
The only difference is the impression on the client. If you are Fred, and you create a rep for yourself, and people get to know Fred, then you really should have Fred in the name.
A possible, crass, reason for the Riley lady's suggestion. If you are Enfusiasm, and you sell your biz, then the future quality/re-sale value of the work, could go anywhere up/down. Or you could farm out your production to the 3rd world, and still put the sudio name on it.
I think it only matters as far as you want to go. Do you want to sell $10K pieces, or 10K of pieces.
I've also seen a split identity situation, one studio, but 2 divisions, Fred's art, and Pretty shiny things inc.
I agree that the work is the MOST important thing, and while it MAY sell itself, marketing cognicence won't hurt.
Greg
A possible, crass, reason for the Riley lady's suggestion. If you are Enfusiasm, and you sell your biz, then the future quality/re-sale value of the work, could go anywhere up/down. Or you could farm out your production to the 3rd world, and still put the sudio name on it.
I think it only matters as far as you want to go. Do you want to sell $10K pieces, or 10K of pieces.
I've also seen a split identity situation, one studio, but 2 divisions, Fred's art, and Pretty shiny things inc.
I agree that the work is the MOST important thing, and while it MAY sell itself, marketing cognicence won't hurt.
Greg
-
Cynthia
I know a glass artist who has three different studio names (dba under the same license) for three different markets and types of his work.
His high end one-of-a-kind art pieces are marketed under his name. His production pieces that are more gift trade items are marketed and distributed under a studio name like Glasstastic Studio. His mid-range work that is fine design, but not one-of-a-kind is marketed with a Studio moniker that is more sedate like Sandpiper Studio.
I kind of likened it to Kenmore vs. Whirlpool...made by the same manufacturer, but one is premium and one is discount. It's probably the same machine, but perception is everything.
Each line is being marketed to a different audience so he is creating an image with the work as well as with the studio name, which I believe he tried to make sound like the work he's putting out there. As an example, without knowing these people, how would you describe Chuck compared to Charles or Bitsy compared to Elisabeth?
Makes sense to me. If I see work made by Glasstastic Studio, I have a different expectation of it that I do from work that is created by and represented as the work done by Bob Green the individual artist. That's how I percieve it anyway.
His high end one-of-a-kind art pieces are marketed under his name. His production pieces that are more gift trade items are marketed and distributed under a studio name like Glasstastic Studio. His mid-range work that is fine design, but not one-of-a-kind is marketed with a Studio moniker that is more sedate like Sandpiper Studio.
I kind of likened it to Kenmore vs. Whirlpool...made by the same manufacturer, but one is premium and one is discount. It's probably the same machine, but perception is everything.
Each line is being marketed to a different audience so he is creating an image with the work as well as with the studio name, which I believe he tried to make sound like the work he's putting out there. As an example, without knowing these people, how would you describe Chuck compared to Charles or Bitsy compared to Elisabeth?
Makes sense to me. If I see work made by Glasstastic Studio, I have a different expectation of it that I do from work that is created by and represented as the work done by Bob Green the individual artist. That's how I percieve it anyway.
-
Phil Hoppes
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 2:20 pm
- Location: Overgaard, AZ
I absolutely agree that the art is what makes the sale...but I also agree with Riley's in this case. Once buyers are familiar with your work, the name is less important than the fact that you're using it consistently. Before then, though, you want to be careful.
What is your ultimate goal for your work? Do you want to sell one-of-a-kind art in galleries or are you selling to a more mass/production/resale market? Do you eventually want personal recognition for your work? Are you working by yourself or in a partnership?
In my day job (marketing and publishing) we discourage giving synthetic titles (i.e., words that don't exist in the dictionary) to businesses or products unless the name also incorporates the subject area or the company is willing to spend significant money and effort on establishing "brand" recognition. When the product is strongly and personally creative we also tend to discourage DBAs.
If you are making art and NOT doing something that requires a DBA (such as working in a collaborative relationship that would require a collective name) then I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to market your work under your own name.
It's your name, no one can keep you from using it, and everyone will understand it. It's probably free of trademark issues, which can be an enormous headache and wind up costing you thousands of dollars if it turns out someone else has already trademarked your DBA.
Marketing your work under your own name also ensures that you don't waste time with the "yes, Enfusiasm is really me" bit and can focus customers' attention on the art, not an exploration of your business strategies.
Art collectors tend to expect artists to sell under their own names. DBAs may imply lower quality or mass production. Even if you're not ready to sell your work as fine art now, if that's a possibility for the future you don't want to face a lot of work rebranding yourself from "Enfusiasm" to "Phil Hoppes."
If you're in a partnership, where multiple artists collaborate on a single piece, you have a small "factory" set up to produce your designs in quantity, or you're producing for a resale market where the work is liable to be relabeled anyway, then a DBA may be appropriate.
BTW...If a prospective buyer didn't know anything about you, the name "Enfusiasm" by itself might not give him enough information to instantly understand what you're selling. For all he'd know, "Enfusiasm" comes from the word "infuse" and means "someone who loves to sell fine herb teas!"
Expanding the name to "Enfusiasm Glass Art" (or for that matter "Phil Hoppes, Glass Artist") identifies your product clearly.
--cynthia
What is your ultimate goal for your work? Do you want to sell one-of-a-kind art in galleries or are you selling to a more mass/production/resale market? Do you eventually want personal recognition for your work? Are you working by yourself or in a partnership?
In my day job (marketing and publishing) we discourage giving synthetic titles (i.e., words that don't exist in the dictionary) to businesses or products unless the name also incorporates the subject area or the company is willing to spend significant money and effort on establishing "brand" recognition. When the product is strongly and personally creative we also tend to discourage DBAs.
If you are making art and NOT doing something that requires a DBA (such as working in a collaborative relationship that would require a collective name) then I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to market your work under your own name.
It's your name, no one can keep you from using it, and everyone will understand it. It's probably free of trademark issues, which can be an enormous headache and wind up costing you thousands of dollars if it turns out someone else has already trademarked your DBA.
Marketing your work under your own name also ensures that you don't waste time with the "yes, Enfusiasm is really me" bit and can focus customers' attention on the art, not an exploration of your business strategies.
Art collectors tend to expect artists to sell under their own names. DBAs may imply lower quality or mass production. Even if you're not ready to sell your work as fine art now, if that's a possibility for the future you don't want to face a lot of work rebranding yourself from "Enfusiasm" to "Phil Hoppes."
If you're in a partnership, where multiple artists collaborate on a single piece, you have a small "factory" set up to produce your designs in quantity, or you're producing for a resale market where the work is liable to be relabeled anyway, then a DBA may be appropriate.
BTW...If a prospective buyer didn't know anything about you, the name "Enfusiasm" by itself might not give him enough information to instantly understand what you're selling. For all he'd know, "Enfusiasm" comes from the word "infuse" and means "someone who loves to sell fine herb teas!"
Expanding the name to "Enfusiasm Glass Art" (or for that matter "Phil Hoppes, Glass Artist") identifies your product clearly. --cynthia